WSP03260 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ .... .... C) .:'") C) farmlands and residential areas provides an element of diversity. Residents use the existing canal O&M road for unauthorized recreational activities such as bicycling, walking, and jogging. In addition, trash disposal, recreational driving, shooting, and vandalism occurs. General Impacts As discussed in the FEIS, lining the Government Highline Canal would reduce seepage and consequently wetland areas down gradient from the canal. The FEIS also cited local impacts of construction such as traffic increases and access disruption. Alternatives in this assessment have comparable salt loading reductions and water quality improvement aspects. Under the concrete lining alternatives (Cl and C2), human and wildlife safety problems would increase significantly; under membrane lining (Ml, M3, and M4) they would decline. vegetation would be reduced along the canal with all alternatives; but based on observations of other concrete and membrane-lined canals in the Grand Valley, vegetation returns along membrane-lined canals to a greater degree than along concrete- lined canals. Modified Ml and M3 Alternatives would require the purchase of more fee land from adjacent landowners. All alternatives would require acquisition of temporary ROW for construction. There are no major differences in alternatives in relation to irrigation supplies, soils, agricultural practices, water quality, endangered species, air quality, and cultural resources. Other environmental parameters--land use, wildlife and vegetation, esthetics, recreation, and socio-economic factors--are impacted in different ways by the alternatives; these factors are discussed in more detail below. The FEIS can also be referred to for information on these resources. Land Use Existing land uses along Reaches lA and 15 of the canal include residential-suburban uses, agricultural uses, transportation and utility corridors, and unimproved lands. Reach lA has long been noted for its fruit production. In recent years the majority of land use changes in the area have been related to conversion of agriculture lands to residential areas. The irrigation of lands both above and below Reach 1 distinguishes it from Reach 2, where irrigation occurs only south of the canal. In Reach 2, the land south of the canal is used more for grain and hay production although suburban developments have increased over the last 20 years. Non-irrigation lands north of Reach 2 are generally used for grazing. The FEIS did not project significant land use changes in the valley due to lining of the Government Highline Canal. Under alternative 24